HARTFORD -- It will be more than two months before former state Sen. Ernest Newton learns whether he is going to trial on state charges of campaign finance fraud. His lawyer contends that Newton was the victim of State Elections Enforcement Commission witch hunt.

State Superior Court Judge Joan Alexander said Thursday she expects to issue a decision March 27 on Newton's request to dismiss the arrest warrant because of alleged inconsistencies, and misleading and incomplete information in the accompanying affidavit.

Both Newton, dressed in an eye-catching royal blue suit with matching shoes, and Darnell Crosland, his lawyer, expressed confidence that they proved their case to the judge and the charges of first-degree larceny, public campaign finance fraud and witness tampering should be dropped.

"What's important for the judge to consider are two things with the arrest warrant affidavit -- it was misleading and it left out additional information that would have been a help to the court," Crosland said. "It's replete with mistakes and misrepresentations."

He claimed that occurred "because Mr. Newton was not supposed to be running, in their minds."

Although Newton received the endorsement of the Bridgeport Democratic Party to run for his old 23rd District state Senate seat in 2012, many felt he should have stayed on the sidelines. Newton had resigned the seat in 2005 after pleading guilty to federal corruption charges for which he was sentenced to five years in prison.

He ended up losing his bid to reclaim the seat in a three-way primary.

The new charges stem from last-minute contributions of $100 each from five people on July 17, 2012. The contributions allowed Newton to meet the $15,000 minimum to qualify for $80,000 in public financing. The contributions surfaced moments after the campaign had been told it did not qualify for the public money.

After an investigation, the State Elections Enforcement Commission alleged that Newton was behind the contributions and persuaded the individuals to sign the donation cards without providing the money.

Newton has repeatedly denied any involvement and has pleaded not guilty.

Crosland charged that had the judge involved been aware of that information, the warrant would not have been signed. He also said the affidavit is confusing because two of the witnesses questioned by investigators have the same initials -- M.B. One is identified as Mark Bush and other only by initials, leading anyone who reads the affidavit to think all the information came from Bush, he said.

Assistant State's Attorney Kevin Shay advised the judge that the references clearly belong to two different people. He said M.B. is Mark Bogues, one of the alleged contributors.

For nearly four hours Thursday, Alexander heard testimony from Newton campaign workers and supporters who testified their candidate was not present when the mysterious contributions appeared.

"He threw up his hands and walked out," McBride-Lee said. "He was upset. He didn't talk to anybody, he was so angry."

After learning of the shortfall, McBride-Lee said both she and a young woman offered to make up the difference. However, McBride-Lee said, she did not have to do so because others apparently did.

Williams testified the money and the signed contribution cards appeared on her desk.

"I don't know where the money came from," she said. "I was talking to my cousin ... When I turned around the money was there."

Coviello said his job was to stay by Newton's side during the campaign because of the candidate's prior federal conviction and Newton's admission of being a recovering substance abuser.

Coviello said that campaign "was concerned their opponents would put Mr. Newton in a position so he would violate rules. I was there to make sure it never happened, and it never did."

Both Coviello and Williams charged that during the campaign, contributors were receiving calls from people identifying themselves as elections enforcement officials. They asked questions about the contributions.

Coviello also said his involvement in Newton's defense has led to the state investigating him and subpoenaing his bank records to determine if he supplied the $500.

"I never had any money to give anyone," Coviello testified. "I had $9.96 in my bank account on July 17, 2012. My balance for the entire month was $38.07."

However, Shay pointed out that Coviello was paid $500 a week after Newton qualified for the public grant. Coviello said that was for expenses he incurred while working for the campaign.